IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/pubcho/v160y2014i1p251-273.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What’s a losing party to do? The calculus of contesting state legislative elections

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Carsey
  • William Berry

Abstract

Existing theories of contesting elections typically treat all potential challengers as identical while under-playing the importance of political parties and primary contests. We offer a theory addressing these issues based on how the various actors in the process define and evaluate the probability of winning an election and the value of the office being contested. We test our theory by estimating a model predicting which of three responses a party that loses a legislative race makes in the next cycle: nominating the same candidate, nominating a new candidate, or nominating no one. We find substantial empirical support for our theory. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Carsey & William Berry, 2014. "What’s a losing party to do? The calculus of contesting state legislative elections," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 160(1), pages 251-273, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:160:y:2014:i:1:p:251-273
    DOI: 10.1007/s11127-013-0079-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11127-013-0079-5
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11127-013-0079-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard L. Fox & Jennifer L. Lawless, 2005. "To Run or Not to Run for Office: Explaining Nascent Political Ambition," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 49(3), pages 642-659, July.
    2. Coates, Dennis & Munger, Michael C, 1995. "Win, Lose, or Withdraw: A Categorical Analysis of Career Patterns in the House of Representatives, 1948-1978," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 83(1-2), pages 95-111, April.
    3. Black, Gordon S., 1972. "A Theory of Political Ambition: Career Choices and the Role of Structural Incentives," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 66(1), pages 144-159, March.
    4. Jacobson, Gary C., 1989. "Strategic Politicians and the Dynamics of U.S. House Elections, 1946–86," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 83(3), pages 773-793, September.
    5. Maestas, Cherie D. & Fulton, Sarah & Maisel, L. Sandy & Stone, Walter J., 2006. "When to Risk It? Institutions, Ambitions, and the Decision to Run for the U.S. House," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 100(2), pages 195-208, May.
    6. Fiorina, Morris P., 1994. "Divided Government in the American States: A Byproduct of Legislative Professionalism?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 88(2), pages 304-316, June.
    7. Keane, Michael P, 1992. "A Note on Identification in the Multinomial Probit Model," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 10(2), pages 193-200, April.
    8. Walter J. Stone & L. Sandy Maisel & Cherie D. Maestas, 2004. "Quality Counts: Extending the Strategic Politician Model of Incumbent Deterrence," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 48(3), pages 479-495, July.
    9. Hall, Richard L. & Van Houweling, Robert P., 1995. "Avarice and Ambition in Congress: Representatives' Decisions to Run or Retire from the U.S. House," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 89(1), pages 121-136, March.
    10. Born, Richard, 1986. "Strategic Politicians and Unresponsive Voters," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 80(2), pages 599-612, June.
    11. Berry, William D. & Berkman, Michael B. & Schneiderman, Stuart, 2000. "Legislative Professionalism and Incumbent Reelection: The Development of Institutional Boundaries," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 94(4), pages 859-874, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kevin Arceneaux & Johanna Dunaway & Martin Johnson & Ryan J. Vander Wielen, 2020. "Strategic Candidate Entry and Congressional Elections in the Era of Fox News," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(2), pages 398-415, April.
    2. Steven Rogers, 2016. "National Forces in State Legislative Elections," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 667(1), pages 207-225, September.
    3. Cherie D. Maestas & Cynthia R. Rugeley, 2008. "Assessing the “Experience Bonus” Through Examining Strategic Entry, Candidate Quality, and Campaign Receipts in U.S. House Elections," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(3), pages 520-535, July.
    4. Stratmann, Thomas, 2005. "Ballot access restrictions and candidate entry in elections," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 59-71, March.
    5. Thomas Stratmann, 2006. "Contribution limits and the effectiveness of campaign spending," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 129(3), pages 461-474, December.
    6. Anselm Hager & Lukas Hensel & Johannes Hermle & Christopher Roth, 2024. "Political Activists are Not Driven by Instrumental Motives: Evidence from Two Natural Field Experiments," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 274, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    7. Fedeli, Silvia & Forte, Francesco & Leonida, Leone, 2014. "The law of survival of the political class: An analysis of the Italian parliament (1946–2013)," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 102-121.
    8. Mitchell Hoffman & Elizabeth Lyons, 2020. "A time to make laws and a time to fundraise? On the relation between salaries and time use for state politicians," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(3), pages 1318-1358, August.
    9. Auerbach, Jan, 2022. "Productive Office and Political Elitism," MPRA Paper 114582, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Wingrove, Sara & Fitzsimons, Gráinne M., 2022. "Interpersonal consequences of conveying goal ambition," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    11. Joel Slemrod, 2005. "The Etiology of Tax Complexity: Evidence from U.S. State Income Tax Systems," Public Finance Review, , vol. 33(3), pages 279-299, May.
    12. Vítor Castro & Rodrigo Martins, 2013. "Running for office again: evidence from Portuguese municipal elections," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 156(3), pages 677-702, September.
    13. Alexander, Dan, 2021. "Uncontested incumbents and incumbent upsets," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 163-185.
    14. Thomas Stratmann, 2003. "Tainted Money? Contribution Limits and the Effectiveness of Campaign Spending," CESifo Working Paper Series 1044, CESifo.
    15. Jason Poulos, 2019. "Land lotteries, long-term wealth, and political selection," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 178(1), pages 217-230, January.
    16. Eggers, Andy & Hainmueller, Jens, 2008. "MPs for Sale? Estimating Returns to Office in Post-War British Politics," MPRA Paper 7892, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Kentaro Fukumoto, 2009. "Systematically Dependent Competing Risks and Strategic Retirement," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(3), pages 740-754, July.
    18. Scott Gehlbach & Konstantin Sonin & Ekaterina Zhuravskaya, 2010. "Businessman Candidates," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(3), pages 718-736, July.
    19. Fernandez-Cornejo, Jorge & Wechsler, Seth James, 2012. "Fifteen Years Later: Examining the Adoption of Bt Corn Varieties by U.S. Farmers," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124257, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    20. Matthew Gentzkow, 2007. "Valuing New Goods in a Model with Complementarity: Online Newspapers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(3), pages 713-744, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:160:y:2014:i:1:p:251-273. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.